Where the power lies: multiple stakeholder politics over natural ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Abbreviations ADB Asian Development Bank ACM Adaptive collaborative management AGRITEX Agriculture and technical and extension services (Ministry of Agriculture) CIDA Canadian International Development Aid CIFOR Center for International Forestry Research COTTCO Cotton Company of Zimbabwe CAMPFIRE Communal area management program for indigenous resources DfID United Kingdom Department for International Development FC Forestry Commission IES Institute of Environmental Studies MP Member of Parliament NGO Non government organization RDC Rural district council RMC Resource management committee PAR Participatory action research PRA Participatory rural appraisal VIDCO Village Development Committee ZANU PF Zimbabwe African National Unity Patriotic Front CIRAD International Center for Agronomic Research and Development IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture vi
Foreword The The workings workings of of power power pervade pervade our our dealings dealings in in in everyday everyday life life and and and we we ignore ignore ignore them them at at our our peril… peril… (Slocum (Slocum et et et et et al. al. al. al. al. 1995:20) 1995:20) Negotiations, promises, none attendance, inducements, vote buying, lobbying, threats (intimidation) or bargains constitute some of the many ways stakeholders use to resolve choices and priorities in relation to each other within a group. Often relations within and among the stakeholders are highly complex and very dynamic depending on the nature of the resource being managed. The more valuable and contested the resource, the more complex and volatile the relations. Often the distribution of power in these groups is skewed towards certain stakeholders and in some cases they wield this power unchallenged by others. Inequitable distribution of power is a reality of many multiple stakeholder groups, but the challenge facing researchers and practitioners working in -multiple stakeholder groups is finding ways to enhance wider stakeholder participation in decision making and action so that no one stakeholder or faction holds absolute power (Box 1). Participation is often associated with the distribution of power in society, as it is power which enables a group to determine which needs and whose priorities need to be considered. Box 1. What is a stakeholder? Stakeholder is a term, which over the last few years, has come into common usage by most donor organizations: it was first used in business management theory and has since been widely adopted as a further refinement to the user concept. It is an umbrella term, which covers all the people and organizations who have a stake in and may be affected by an activity, a development program or situation or who may have an impact on it. (Hobley and Malla 1996:97) To be successful in facilitating wider participation, it is critical that one is able to diagnose the relative power of the various stakeholders and comprehend the patterns of interdependence (Pfeffer 1992). Further, Pfeffer notes that the knowledge of the power distribution is itself an important source of power, and that an accurate perception of distribution of power is a necessary prerequisite for any stakeholder seeking powerful support for their demands. In this dynamic power-laden process there are no neutral parties; everyone is engaged (Long and Long 1992, Slocum et al. 1995). We can focus on a number of key questions to understand power relations: Whose cooperation and support is necessary to achieve my objectives? Whose opposition would derail or stall my plans?
Page 2: © 2002 by Center for International
Page 5 and 6: Table of contents List of Boxes, Ta
Page 7: Acknowledgements This publication h
Page 11 and 12: Box 3. Why should we be concerned w
Page 13 and 14: Box 4. The politics of shade trees
Page 15 and 16: Making sense of power relations ‘
Page 17 and 18: Within a group, we can think of pow
Page 19 and 20: of power. Further, relations that w
Page 21 and 22: Figure 1. Steps in the analysis of
Page 23 and 24: Key informant interviews Interviews
Page 25 and 26: Table 1. Stakeholders involved in f
Page 27 and 28: Methodological issues: Institutiona
Page 29 and 30: Table 2. Locally constituted classe
Page 31 and 32: To understand better what types of
Page 33 and 34: Box 11. When data starts coming to
Page 35 and 36: out when we try to understand relat
Page 37 and 38: Suggested methods Participant obser
Page 39 and 40: facilitate more involvement by obse
Page 41 and 42: events without proper verification.
Page 43 and 44: over an issue. Alliances change, an
Page 45 and 46: efore, relations among stakeholders
Page 47 and 48: References Abel, N. and Blaikie, P.
Page 50 and 51: Development of the framework in Zim
Page 52 and 53: List of boxes, figures and tables i
Page 54 and 55: Abbreviations ADB Asian Development
Page 56 and 57: Annex 1. Mafungautsi Joint Forest M
Page 58 and 59:
Box 1.1 Niches in Zimbabwean forest
Page 60 and 61:
to manage the implementation of the
Page 62 and 63:
Table 1.3 Beekeeping Committee and
Page 64 and 65:
Table 1.6 Participation in Mrembwe
Page 66 and 67:
esidency is not sanctioned by them
Page 68 and 69:
up as part of efforts by government
Page 70 and 71:
eekeeping or thatch grass harvestin
Page 72 and 73:
RMC when a former treasurer used th
Page 74 and 75:
Forestry Commission and the communi
Page 76 and 77:
Annex 2. Simudzirayi Microcredit Sc
Page 78 and 79:
than that they were elected by the
Page 80 and 81:
The committee and the Ngonyama fami
Page 82 and 83:
Box 2.2 Mapping relationships in ov
Page 84 and 85:
laws when they were aware that the
Page 86:
References Bradley, P.N. and McNama
show all

Where the power lies: multiple stakeholder politics over natural ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?